The Novice’s Guide to “Rail” Transit Or…………

…………..cutting through the BS about light rail, SkyTrain and BRT.

The following is a guide plus definitions about “rail” transit for the November civic elections.

ALM: Automatic Light metro, the fourthAi??marketing name given for the SkyTrain family of light-metros, when Lavalin briefly ownedAi??SkyTrain before gong bankrupt.

ALRT (1): Advanced Light Rail Transit, the secondAi??marketing name for SkyTrain.

ALRT (2): Advanced Light Rapid Transit, the third marketing name for SkyTrain, when Advanced Light Rail Transit failed to find a market.

ART: Advanced Rapid Transit, the fifth marketing name for SkyTrain, used by its current owners, Bombardier Inc.

Automatic (Driverless) Operation: A signaling system that permits train operation without drivers. Contrary to popular myth, automatic operation does not reduce operating costs because there are no drivers, because attendants must be hired insteadAi??to permit safe operation. Automatic signaling was signed to reduce signaling staff, not operation staff.

Bus Rapid Transit (BRT): Generally means “Express Buses”, a true BRT needs a very expensive and land consuming busway or highway or be guided.

 

 

 

 

 

Busway: A route needed for BRT. Busways can be conventional HOV lanes or exclusive roads for buses. Busways can be equipped with raised curbs or rails for bus guidance.

Canada Line: Vancouver’s third metro line which is a grade separated EMU operation and is not compatible with the rest of the SkyTrain systemAi??in operation.

Capacity: A function of headway multiplied by vehicle capacity, measured in persons per hour per direction.

Consultation: To sell a transit decision to the public after the decision has been made.

Expo Line: The first SkyTrain line built, completed in late 1985. The ExpoAi??was built inAi??in three sections. The Waterfront to New Westminster section (cost a much as LRT from Vancouver to Whalley, Lougheed Mall and Richmond Centre), theAi??SkybridgeAi??section across the Fraser river to Scott road Station, and the final section to Whalley in Surrey.

Grade: The vertical rise of a railway track, normally given in a percentage (1% grade = a 1 metre rise in 100 metres). Industry standard grade for LRT is 8%; Sheffield’s LRTAi??operates onAi??10% grades; the maximum grade for a tramway is located in Lisbon, where the streetcars operate, unassisted, on 13.8% grades.

 

 

 

Goebbels Gambit: The fine art of repeating a lie often enough that it is perceived as the truth.

Guided Bus: A BRT that is physically guided by either a raised curb or a central rail. Some guided buses are considered monorails.

Headway: The time interval between trains on a transit route.

Hybrid: A transit system that is designed operated asAi??a LRT/light metro mix. Generally very expensive as it uses the most expensive features of both modes.

ICTS: Intermediate Capacity Transit system, the first name SkyTrain was marketed by.

 

 

 

 

 

Interurban: An early streetcar which operated at speed on its own R-o-W connecting urban centres.

Light RailAi?? (LRT): A steel wheel on steel rail transit system that can operate economically on transit routes with traffic flows between 2,000 pphpd to over 20,000 pphpd, thus bridging the gap on what buses can carry and that which needs a metro. A streetcar is considered LRT when it operates on reserved rights-of-ways or R-o-W’s for the exclusive use of the streetcar/tram. Number of LRT/tramways in operation around the world 461; light railways (many use LRV’s) – 119; heritage lines – 60.

Light Metro: A transit mode, generally a proprietary transit system, that has the capacity of LRT,Ai??at the cost of a heavy-rail metro.

Light Rail Vehicle (LRV): A vehicle that operates on a LRT or streetcar line. Also called a streetcar, tram, TramTrain or interurban.

Mass Transit: A generic term for heavy-rail metro. See rapid transit.

Metro: An urban/suburban railway that operates on a segregated R-o-W, either in a subway or on a viaduct, due to long trains (8 cars+) and close headways. There are 174 heavy/light metros in operation around the world.

Millennium Line:Ai?? The second SkyTrain Line built, using the new Bombardier ART cars.

Monorail: A transit mode that operates on one rail. There are two general types of monorail: 1) hanging monorail and 2) straddle beam monorail (not a true monorail). Some proprietary BRT systems are also classed as monorail.

 

 

 

Priority Signaling: A signaling system that gives priority to transit vehicles at intersections.

Proprietary Transit System: A transit system who rights are exclusively owned by one company. Transit operations who operate proprietary transit systems must deal with only one supplier.

Rapid Transit: A generic term for metro. See mass transit.

Reserved Rights of Way: An exclusive R-o-w for use of transit vehicles, can be as simple as a HOV lane (with rails for LRT) or as elaborate a a lawned boulevard or a linear park complete with shrubs.

SkyTrain: An unconventional proprietary light-metro, powered by Linear Induction motors, marketed by Bombardier Inc. Currently there are 7 SkyTrain type transit systems in operation around the world. ICTS – 2; ALRT (1 & 2) – 1; ART 4.

 

 

 

 

Streetcar: A steel wheel, on steel rail electric (also can be diesel powered) vehicle that operates in mixed traffic, with little or no priority at intersections. Also known as a tram in Europe. Streetcars become LRT when operating on reserved R-o-W’s.

 

 

 

 

Tram: European term for streetcar, as the Europeans do not use the term LRT.

TramTrain: A streetcar that can operate on the mainline railways, operating as a passenger train.

 

 

 

 

TransLink Speak: The lexicon used by TransLink to mask problems. Example: medial emergency on SkyTrain means a suicide.

Viaduct: A viaduct isAi??a bridgeAi??composed of several small spans.

Those living in glass houses………….

On another blog, the author was ranting on and on about the various accidents that befell light rail operations around the world, while at the same time pretending that SkyTrain was accident free.

Yes accidents to happen on light rail/streetcar systems, but they also happen on SkyTrain. The SkyTrain lobby should do well remembering the old proverb; “ Tho se who live in glass houses should not throw stones”

 

Elderly woman struck by SkyTrain at Nanaimo station

Vancouver Sun October 23, 2011 10:06 PM

 

 

An elderly woman was struck by a SkyTrain at Nanaimo station Sunday night, according to Vancouver Fire Deputy Chief Mark Engler.

The woman was trapped under the train, Engler said, but fire crews were able to extract her and she was being treated by medical personnel.

SkyTrain service was shut down between Nanaimo and Joyce stations during the incident and a bus was shuttling passengers between them

Addendum: According to the Vancouver Province, the woman has now died of injuries.

http://www.theprovince.com/Nanaimo+SkyTrain+station+closed+police+incident/5595434/story.html

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Elderly+woman+struck+SkyTrain+Nanaimo+station/5595397/story.html

Velo Rail – Touring France by bicycle on rail!

A new way to use old railway lines in FranceAi??- Velo Rail. I wonder if RftV could get one in operation, from Chilliwack to Yarrow, on the days the freight train doesn’t operate.

For more information on a Velo Rail holiday, please visit……..

http://www.veloraildularzac.com/UK/Velorail_du_larzac_accueil.awp

Adios the Detroit “Mugger mover”?

It seems while the locals try to reinvent the SkyTrain light-metroAi??in Vancouver,Ai??the Detroit ICTS system is close to shutting its doors. If the Detroit “Mugger Mover” and the Toronto Scarborough go into the history books, it will mean the end of the firstAi??generation of the SkyTrain ICTS/ALRT light metro system,Ai??leaving only five SkyTrain type systems left in operation.

The financially-troubled automated downtown Detroit people mover which operates a loop service may be closed, WDIV reports. A reprieve might come if an alternative funding source is found.

Ai??

The Detroit ICTS/SkyTrain people mover.

DETROIT — Unless an alternative source of money is found within the next few weeks, the Detroit People Mover will shut down at the end of December.

The light rail’s ridership has been down and Detroit was forced to pull millions of dollars out of the subsidy because of the ongoing budget crisis.

The city has been seeking an alternative source for funding the People Mover, but that source has not been found. The city has been selling some of the 13 stops’ naming rights, but it hasn’t been enough to cover operation costs.

To help cover costs, the operations staff has been cut and the ticket price was raised from 50 cents to 75 cents.

Mayor Dave Bing’s office said the administration is hoping the state will release escrow funds to operate the system.

City Council President Charles Pugh insists the People Mover will not completely cease operations.

“Our goal is to not let it shut down, or severely decrease it to the point where it’s insignificant,” Pugh said. “The People Mover does serve a function, and we have to keep that in mind — that it serves an important function.”

Regardless of the system’s importance as a mode of transportation downtown, Pugh said the People Mover does take a backseat to the Police Department, EMS and Fire Department. He said the City Council’s subsidy for the system was $4 million and that they recently removed $1 million from that.

He said the operating staff was working to become more efficient and that he was confident the system would not close, but the city may need to cut back on the system’s operating hours and make it event-based.

The People Mover began operating in 1987. The track runs a three-mile loop around Detroit’s downtown. There are 13 stops.

http://www.clickondetroit.com/community/29545475/detail.html

Do you want to sit down on the Overground during rush hour or Rules for snagging a seat on SkyTrain.

It's Friday and it is a Pro-D Day (means the kids are home from school, while the teachers sup coffee and tell stories how horrible the children are)!

 

From brelson.com

Do you want to sit down on the Overground during rush hour? Then prepare for war!

A few days ago, on an Overground train from Highbury to Kensington, I had a shocking experience – I failed to get a seat.

If you know how crowded the Overground can get at rush hour, this might not sound all that surprising. Believe me, though, I was good at getting seats. I’d learnt the ropes and tend to overanalyse behaviour on public transport, so it had never been a problem. But I’d been away for a few weeks and my seat-acquisition skills had gone beyond rusty – they were useless.

So, as a form of therapy, I decided to try to work out the “rules” of the seat-acquisition game on the Overground. Here they are, in illustrated form.

The theatre of conflict

The Overground train arrives and dazed commuters spill on to the platform. Everyone stands aside to let them pass. But this act of kindness is the exception, not the rule. Once you all step into the carriage the competition for seats begins. You are now in a theatre of war.

Know your enemies

You share the strategic space of the carriage with many other players. Here’s a brief rundown of who they are:

• Aspirants – People standing who want to sit down. This includes you.
• Civilians – People standing who don’t want to sit down, maybe because they’re not going far.
• Occupants – People currently sitting down. Don’t be fooled though: they’re still in the game.

In a typical combat situation (or “rush hour”) here’s how the players might be distributed across the theatre of conflict.

Civilians linger near the doors while Aspirants occupy strategic positions nearer the seats. I’ll come to these later. First, here’s an ill-advised opening move that could undermine your whole campaign.

Don’t take the wrong turn

When you first get on the train you might turn towards the divide in between two carriages. Don’t! This is an unforgiving quagmire. Much like Napoleon in Russia, your campaign will come to a crushing, drawn-out end if you venture here.

There are few seats here so chances of victory are slim. On one side you’re bordered by the crowded doorway, on the other you’re hemmed in by the barren, seatless inter-carriage zone, so withdrawing to another region could prove impossible. Stay well away.

Get into position – but act casual

Get yourself into the long aisle, where the seats are most abundant. This is the fertile valley of the Overground carriage.

But don’t push past people to get here. Try to act casual, like you don’t really want to sit down anyway. As Sun Tzu said, “All warfare is based on deception“. Seem too predatory and you’ll raise the suspicions of other Aspirants, losing the element of surprise. Let them think you’re a disinterested Civilian.

A well-chosen spot gives you a tactical advantage over three, maybe four, seats. Take care when picking your spot, and check for things like:

• Have the seat occupants only just sat down? If so it might be a while before they get off.
• Can you guess where their occupants might be heading to? For example you can spot BBC people easily (branded building passes, reading Ariel, cooking up ways to irritate the Daily Mail). They’re going all the way to Shepherd’s Bush, so find a new spot.
• Who else lurks in the same area? If there are pregnant or infirm Aspirants you should move elsewhere – unless, of course, the Overground has completely erased your sense of ethics.
• Are the Occupants checking the station name or folding up their newspaper? If so then they may be close to departure.

Having found your spot you’re now engaged in a tactical skirmish with other nearby Aspirants. This will play out in a smaller and more manageable space.

Things might seem straightforward from now on – someone will get up, you’ll sit down, mission accomplished. But it’s still too soon for complacency.

Entering end game

This might be the end of your campaign if earlier strategic decisions were sound and luck’s on your side. Other passengers, however, play by their own rules, so there could be some surprises ahead. Here are some end-game scenarios and how to handle them.

1. The Occupant’s Deceit

The Occupant of a contested seat puts their book away. Suddenly you’re interested in nothing else, watching them like a hawk to be sure you’ll bag their seat.

Distracted, you fail to notice a seat that is legitimately yours becoming empty. An opportunistic Aspirant sneaks in to grab it. Then, to compound your error, the Occupant you’re eyeballing just sits there looking like butter wouldn’t melt in their mouth and you’re stuck on your feet. You lose this round.

Don’t let any single Occupant claim your undivided attention – sometimes people put their books away because they’re bored of reading, they want to sleep, or they simply enjoy messing with your mind.

2. 360-degree Combat

It’s easy to get a kind of tunnel vision when staring at the same three or four people for so long. You can easily forget that there’s a whole other row of seats immediately behind you.

So when a seat behind you becomes vacant, will you be quick to notice? If not then it’s a lost opportunity. The trick here is to somehow know what’s going on behind you without overtly gawping – remember your Sun Tzu. As always on the Overground, subtlety is essential.

Edit: A few people commenting after this was posted mentioned that they look in the window to see the reflections of people behind them. I didn’t know this trick. No wonder I’ve been spending so much time standing

3. The Art of Misdirection

Imagine two Aspirants have equal claim to a seat and the Occupant gets up. Who wins? Sometimes it’s about who acts smartest, not who acts first.

The departing Occupant decides which door to head towards. Sometimes it’s the nearest door, but on a crowded Overground carriage they’ll usually choose the path of least resistance.

Exploit this to your advantage by shifting your position to create an easy route for them. As they move past, do that “orbiting” kind of motion that people do in busy spaces, spinning around them so you switch places while gracefully intruding between the seat and your thwarted enemy.

Get it right and you’ll effortlessly drop into their seat while looking like a helpful and polite person, and not the scheming and conniving seat-fancier you are.

A final note – and a confession

This guide should help you achieve comfort on the Overground, but I must confess that my last few journeys have been spent standing up, so maybe I’m not the best teacher. Maybe I’ve lost the hunger, the brutality, the sharpness of wit that’s needed to compete on these trains. The truth is that I don’t need that hunger any more – my company is moving next weekend, to an office 20 minutes’ walk from my house. I’m pretty happy about this.

So while my days as an Overground commuter are over, yours may be only just beginning. If so, be careful out there – and don’t let the war for seats escalate any more than it has to. Enough blood has been shed.

Edit: There’s now a follow-up to this post, about the Geneva Convention of public transport – the sacrosanct, unspoken rules that we all must obey

BRT Buffoonery and a word about Susan Heyes

Some interesting costs associated with BRT. If the following is to be believed, then BRT is more expensive to build and operate than light rail. Maybe that’s why TransLink wants to build BRT in the Fraser Valley. With TransLink, if it costs more to build and operate than light rail, they build it!

Pittsburg BRT, costs more to build and operate than light rail.

From the LRPPro blog.

Ripping out railroad tracks to build a BRT is a total waste of money

we are very short on. Pittsburgh did that on their terribly inefficient

West BusWay in about 2000AD. The BusWay was to run from

Golden Triangle (downtown) to Carnegie, PA., about 8 miles

but they called it the Airport BusWay to get support for it. It was

not to go anywhere near the airport but the AIrport buses would

use part of it even though they already had an interstate highway

279 to run on. It was to cost $ 325 million to build = $ 40 million

per mile over ten years ago. A crooked Senator got Congress to

waive the law and the agreement that required Allegheny County

to ante up the $ 200 million shortfall when the bids came in at

$ 525 million, $ 65 million per mile, far more than Light Rail but

the rotten government let the Port Authority allege that the Bus

Way was only one-third the cost of Light Rail. They supported

that lie by using the cost of the Buffalo full subway when they

should have used the cost of Salt Lake City which was built on

RR tracks.

I was so mad I wrote the FTA about it and I got a lying letter

back explaining that if they built half of the BusWay fofr $ 285

million it would be a better deal than building it all for $ 525

million. NOT TRUE AT ALL. They now attract only 9,000 of

the promised 50,000 weekday passengers.

Or abstractly, Light rail now costs $ 240 average per car hour for 125 passengers in the rush hour = $ 1.92 per passenger.

Buses now cost $ 120 per hour for 57 peak passengers

= $ 2.11 per passenger PLUS 12 % for BusWay and station

maintenance, ploughing and 6 % for proof of payment fare

collection which cost is included in Light Rail basic data.

Sure, a Bus Way would probably use articulated buses with

87 peak capacity but Operations Research study of actual

articulated bus operation in Los Angeles found they cost more

per passenger than 40-foot buses because of complexity and

slower movement.

The TRB has that data. The BusWay bus cost will be $ 2.50 per

passenger, THIRTY PERCENT MORE THAN LRT.

“If the law supposes that,’ said Mr. Bumble, squeezing his hat emphatically in both hands, “the law is a ass–a idiot. If that’s the eye of the law, the law is a bachelor; and the worst I wish the law is, that his eye may be opened by experience–by experience.”

Occupy TransLink and rid ourselves of the SkyTrain cult!

“Of course, taxing everyone a little bit is like putting the frog in the pot before turning up the heat – the mayors must hope the overtaxed and underserved don’t notice the slight increase in pain.”

George Pajari,

VANCOUVER SUN, OCT. 14,

WEST Vancouver resident, high-tech entrepreneur and thorn in the side of council, George Pajari is not too pleased with the TransLink Mayors’ Council vote to approve a two-cents-a-litre gas tax.

Nor is he chuckling at the prospect of an annual $23 property tax hike which, of course, said mayors “hope to avoid.”

Wait till Pajari hears the numbers crunched by fellow thorn, North Vancouver’s Corrie Kost, namely that “the long-term debt of TransLink is about $1,000 per [Metro] resident.”

To emphasize, that is $1,000 over and above the costs of an Evergreen Line and the latest commitments made by your representatives.

Pajari suggests that “people who choose not to use transit” should be “penalized” with road and congestion taxes.

That is where he and I part company, because my position with respect to pouring more dollars down the black hole that is TransLink is this: Not a penny more until we are given two things: a new board of directors and an arms-length, pre-project, value-for-money audit.

Members of the new board must have professional transportation/transit experience, preferably untainted by ties to the federal and provincial governments, and have no current or past connections to companies like Bombardier and SNC-Lavalin.

Next, the audit must be performed by transit-savvy staff from the B.C. auditor general’s office, or similar professionals from the U.K. or Germany.

Why those caveats? Some of the most straightforward email conversations I have had about TransLink in recent months have been with Bowen Island councillor Peter Frinton, a member of the Mayors’ Council. Although he and I differ on some points – along with 15 others he voted for the recent gas tax package – never once has he given me political spin in answer to my questions. Some of his revelations about what passes for democratic process in this region are enough to send you to the drugstore for anti-nauseants.

Last July, after I suggested that if only TransLink would build at-grade systems instead of SkyTrain, most of its funding problems would disappear, Frinton replied, “Most of the mayors/councillors feel the same way, but have made no headway with the province or feds . . . I have no idea why senior government has been so married to [SkyTrain] technology. . . .”

Well, having asked myself the same question every time TransLink held its hand out, I am ready to take the gloves off on a possible answer: Someone somewhere has found it advantageous to choose proprietary SkyTrain over more affordable alternatives – and the beneficiary cannot be Bombardier alone because, as Frinton observed, the company also manufactures light-rail cars.

Nor, despite their recent vote, does it appear to be the yeasayers on the Mayors’ Council. The worst they are guilty of is not telling transportation minister Blair Lekstrom to take his dictates and pay for them.

No, although I have little doubt that some of the advantages have trickled down to a sequence of provincial governments, the TransLink buck stops in Ottawa. Also, because the question being asked has spanned at least 15 years of both Liberal and Conservative governments, whatever the advantages might be, they have been common to both.

Can it be that we pay through the nose merely to keep Quebec happy, or is the situation more sinister than that?

That there is an Ottawa connection seems obvious because, although the questions had their genesis in the mid-1980s when SkyTrain was chosen for the Expo Line, they gathered speed when former NDP premier Glen Clark abruptly changed his mind about using light-rail for the Millennium Line project.

The switch (pressure?) began after he visited Ottawa with Ken Dobell, a former Vancouver City manager under then-mayor Gordon Campbell. The rest is our very expensive TransLink history.

But no matter where the SkyTrain advantages originate, regional taxpayers are left paying for the mess because, as Frinton told me last March, “The provincial government has long attested that Lower Mainland municipalities have ‘property tax room’ as a result of lifting the hospital tax in our area.”

There is much more to tell and sooner or later that will happen. For now, and in support of the relatively few people who try to keep this issue in the public eye, all I will add is this: Rather than trying to Occupy Vancouver without really knowing why, what the protestors could do is start small – Occupy TransLink, deal with that well documented billion-dollar problem and, if that succeeds, move on from there. rimco@shaw.ca

Ai?? Copyright (c) North Shore News

 

Will Toronto’s Transit City Return?

In Toronto, it seems politicians are having a lot of fun with transit. New mayor and anti-tram and tea-bag type Rob Ford received a backhand from the voters when they did not give the Ontario Conservatives a mandate to in the recent election. In fact, the brutish antics of Mayor Ford helped in the defeat of the Hudak conservative party in a classic "snatching defeat from the jaws of victory" election..

Could light rail return to the transit table in Toronto or will Toronto Mayor Ford huffs and bluffs his way along, desperately trying to get multi billion dollars subways built instead, while at the same time transportation crumbles under his reign.

Who is not afraid to bell the Ford cat?

 

The results of last week's provincial government election in Ontario are encouraging to Toronto supporters of "Transit City," who now believe the surface light rail plan killed by Mayor Rob Ford during his first day in office could be revived, the "now toronto dot com" site reports:
http://www.nowtoronto.com/daily/news/story.cfm?content=183135

"Transit City's minority report – For some, last week's provincial election has reopened door on reviving light rail project
 

By Ben Spurr

The results of the provincial election have encouraged progressives still holding out hope for the resurrection of Transit City.

Councillor Adam Vaughan is among the devotees waiting for the transit plan's second coming, and lately he's seeing good omens. One of them is that the mayor's replacement for Transit City has stalled, for the time being at least. The province agreed to fund part of it (the underground LRT along Eglinton), but so far Ford has been unable to secure enough private funds for an extension of the Sheppard Avenue subway.

Another encouraging sign for Vaughan is the results of last week's provincial election, which saw the pro-Transit City NDP gain more power in a minority government, and confirmed that "Ford Nation" no longer has the ear of the province. The political playing field is looking rather different than when Dalton McGuinty acquiesced to a newly-elected and still popular Ford on Transit City.

"You've got a group of councillors who support Transit City, and you've got a significant group of provincial legislators from the GTA who want light rapid transit," says Vaughan. "Meanwhile you've got a mayor who's still dreaming in Technicolor when it comes to Sheppard avenue. The mayor's just one voice in a sea of people with a lot more power than him."

On the transit file, Ford is looking increasingly desperate. The morning after the provincial election, the first thing he did was venture out of his cocoon of protective right-wing media for an interview on the liberal CBC in which he publicly aired his demand for more provincial funding for Toronto transit.

A spokesperson for transportation minister Kathleen Wynne says the province has no plans to give the city more transit money at this time, but if that changes, NDP transit critic Cheri DiNovo says any provincial funding should come with strings attached.

"If the province is going to be paying huge amounts for more transit, the province should have a say in what it's used for," DiNovo says. "And Transit City is the best way of spending it. I'm sure Ford would rather see something built than nothing built. If we're paying the piper we get to call the tune."

Ford's allies at city hall see it differently. As far as TTC chair Karen Stintz is concerned, Transit City, which would have seen a network of light rail branching out across the city, is as dead as ever. The very question of revisiting it exasperates her. "It's not on the table," she says. "I don't even know how to answer the question."

Councillor John Parker, who sits on the TTC board but is on record voicing reservations about Ford's subway plans, doesn't think the provincial election changed anything.

"The proposal that's currently being pursued is one that the mayor worked out with the premier and the minister of transportation," Parker said. "I don't notice changes in any of those offices after the provincial election. So I would expect that the current plan is what those three kingpins are committed to and want to pursue."

Parker admits that if the province forks over more transit money, Queen's Park would have leverage to alter current plans, but he doesn't think it's likely the Liberal minority would make significant changes.

"If you go to somebody else and ask them for money, it would be reasonable for them to tie conditions to it," he said. "But those strings already seem to have been identified. They resulted in the announcement that the mayor's office and Queen's Park made jointly this year," which committed funding for burying the Eglinton crosstown, and scuttled Transit City.

There remains one development that could alter the political equation. When Ford decided to cancel Transit City, he made Toronto liable for the costs associated with work already underway.

That bill from the province is expected to be upwards of $49 million, but mercifully for Ford, who is in the middle of a crusade to stop waste at city hall, it has yet to arrive. Once it does, Transit City may start looking a lot more attractive, says Vaughan.

"There is no $49-million bill to repay if Transit City gets back on track," he said. "For a city and a province looking to save money, the easiest way to save money is to stop canceling things and to start building things."

A spokesperson for Metrolinx, the provincial transit agency, refused to confirm if the entire $49 million would be wiped out if Transit City were rebooted. He also declined to say when Ford can expect the bill. 
 

A Toronto City Council member who formerly served as vice chair of Toronto Transit Commission [TTC] wants to know whether his council colleagues favor a heavy rail subway for Sheppard Avenue or if they wish to return to surface light rail. Mayor Rob Ford declared the surface LRT "Transit City" plan dead on his first day in office. The "inside toronto dot com" site has a report:
http://tinyurl.com/3fjqj8l
 

"DAVID NICKLE

Oct 17, 2011 – 7:30 AM
Subway or LRT along Sheppard, councillor seeks answers from city
Mihevc to make motion at next city council meeting

Former TTC vice chair Joe Mihevc will be asking a few questions about transit along Sheppard Avenue at the upcoming council meeting – in an effort to start debate over whether the city should go ahead with Mayor Rob Ford's plan to build a subway into Scarborough, or to go back to the light rail transit plan that the mayor declared "dead" after his election last year.

Mihevc, who represents St. Pauls on Toronto Council, is submitting an administrative inquiry at the Oct. 24 council meeting that will be seeking answers on the sudden shift in direction on transit policy last year.

In the wake of the provincial election last week and events of this past year, Mihevc said the time is right to start a debate on the $4.2 billion transit plan that Ford embarked upon.

"These are absolutely critical questions related to the future of this city, given all the mobility problems that are only exacerbating themselves," he said.

"So the ground has shifted and obviously the events of the summer – mainly the mayor's declining fortunes and then the provincial election, where from the mayor's point of view a tripartite agreement on the funding of the Sheppard subway didn't materialize… that also plays into this."

Mihevc is asking under what authority the mayor cancelled Transit City; for a status report on the Toronto Transit Infrastructure Company, which was formed earlier this year to devise a plan to have the private sector help pay for the subway; and for a proper assessment of what the city is exposed to in terms of cancellation costs for the Sheppard LRT, which was underway when Ford declared the program dead.

The questions will require an immediate response at the next council meeting. But Mihevc and other councillors are hoping the answers will just be a jumping-off point to a discussion overall of re-instituting the Transit City plan that had been underway when Ford took over as mayor from David Miller.

Over the past year, the mayor entered into talks with Premier Dalton McGuinty to shift the $8 billion in funding that was to have paid for surface light rail transit on Sheppard Avenue and on Eglinton Avenue, entirely over to the Eglinton Scarborough Crosstown LRT.

The city said it would cover the cost of a subway – $4.2 billion – to replace the Sheppard light rail line, through partnerships with the private sector. The premier and the mayor signed a memorandum of understanding and the province set to work on a new, entirely underground Eglinton line.

But council must still debate the memorandum for it to have any force. Although the memorandum was signed in the spring, Ford has yet to bring it before council.
[end text]
 

SkyTrain – increasing rents, but at what cost?

The following item is nothing more than a ‘hard sell’ for the Evergreen Line and for the proposed Broadway subway. Granted that office space near one of Vancouver’s three metro lines have lower vacancy rates and higher rents, but what has not been taken into account is that offices next to the present metro lines are much newer than their neighbours. Also new office buildings are being built on newly rezoned land and thus being new, and being new, command higher prices.

As for the lower vacancy rate, new office space tends to be filled more quickly as it is modern and contains up to date wiring, essential for theAi??modern electronicAi??business office.

What is missing in this study is comparing the age of the offices next to a metro line with offices elsewhere, which I think, would tell its own story.

As Vancouver population rises in the downtown core, due to massive condominium construction, the population has to travel out of the downtown core toAi??go toAi??work and with many families living in the downtown having no car or are one car families, using public transit is a necessity. Here we have a transit dichotomy:

The region is building hugely expensive metro/subway lines out from the city, which residents can commute to workAi??to new offices located near metro stations, in the suburbs;Ai??while residents living in the suburbs areAi??being taxed more to pay for expensive metro lines in Vancouver andAi??are more or less abandoned transit wise, with only skeleton bus services andAi??mostly to the closest metro station and in the end must rely on the car for personal transport.

So here is TransLink’s transit plans, build expensive metro/subway lines in Vancouver/Burnaby, to subsidies property developers in erecting new highrise office towers charging premium rents, paid for by suburban residents payingAi??ever higher gas taxes, property taxesAi??and bridge tolls. And I thought building ‘rail’Ai??transit was to affordable move people, silly me.

 

 

Suburban Vancouver office market driven by rapid transit: report

Jones Lang LaSalle notes that offices near SkyTrain and Canada Line have lower vacancies, higher rents

By BRIAN MORTON, Vancouver SunOctober 18, 2011 5:56 AM

In Richmond, the commercial vacancy rate near the Canada Line is well below half that in the rest of the municipality.

Photograph by: Ric Ernst, Vancouver Sun

METRO VANCOUVER – Proximity to rapid transit is increasingly a key factor in where new offices locate in the suburbs and Vancouverai??i??s outlying areas, according to a report by commercial real estate services firm Jones Lang LaSalle.

ai???The closer, the better,ai??? the companyai??i??s executive vice-president Ray Ahrens said in an interview after Mondayai??i??s release of the Rapid Transit Office Index. ai???The office buildings close to SkyTrain stations are enjoying much lower vacancies. While [it makes sense that] they [are] better occupied, we didnai??i??t know the extent of this until we did the study.ai???

Ahrens said that transit is becoming increasingly popular in Metro Vancouver and ai???our [report] shows clear evidence that office developments located within walking distance of rapid transit have a significant advantage with less vacancy and higher rents.ai??? More people are now commuting from downtown Vancouver to the suburbs for work, he noted.

According to the report, which addressed both suburban municipalities and the city of Vancouverai??i??s outlying area, the direct vacancy rate for buildings within 0.5 kilometres of a rapid transit station is 4.8 per cent compared to 12.3 per cent for the rest of the market, while the average asking rents are approximately eight per cent higher.

The report noted that with a vacancy rate about one-third of areas not served by rapid transit, developers are increasingly looking to build more transit-oriented suburban office complexes.

ai???As downtown and Broadway corridor availability decreases and rents increase, our landlord and tenant clients are becoming more interested in transit-oriented suburban locations,ai??? added Ahrens.

The report cited new office developments taking advantage of the trend, including in New Westminster, where three buildings are scheduled to be ready for occupancy in 2013.

The buildings, which include the new TransLink headquarters, will more than double the areaai??i??s existing ai???Aai??i?? class inventory and be adjacent to the New Westminster and Sapperton SkyTrain stations.

ai???We expect to see continued interest in these [suburban] developments, particularly from employers with back-office operations that do not need to be located downtown,ai??? Ahrens said.

The report noted that a preference for rapid-transit-oriented office space is more muted in the downtown core and Broadway corridor.

ai???Although these markets are serviced by rapid transit, they also benefit from their central location and convenient access to other modes of public transportation such as frequent bus service and the SeaBus. Rapid-transit access, therefore, is not deemed to be a determining factor for tenants in these two regions.ai???

The report cited several benefits of having rapid transit near an office in the suburbs, including the ability for employees to save money on travel costs, and the ability to live in a more affordable suburban neighbourhood.

The report looked at several suburban municipalities, including Surrey, Burnaby, New Westminster and Richmond.

It concluded that the importance of having office space close to SkyTrain appears to be most pronounced in Surrey, where the vacancy rate for office space without rapid transit is 25 per cent, ai???yet buildings near the SkyTrain are a hot commodity, with a direct vacancy rate of just 0.4 per cent.ai???

The index noted that Central City, with 572,778 square feet of office space, is fully occupied.

ai???Gross occupancy costs for buildings with access to the SkyTrain are 33.3 per cent higher than the rest of the Surrey market,ai??? the report added. ai???The combination of high occupancy costs and limited vacancy in buildings with rapid-transit access allows these landlords to negotiate aggressively by seeking high net rental rates and offering modest inducement packages.ai???

For New Westminster, the report said, the direct vacancy rate of buildings along SkyTrain is less than half the rate of the rest of the cityai??i??s office space.

However, the index noted that in Burnaby, there is a much lower discrepancy between vacancy rates of office buildings with SkyTrain access and those located more than half a kilometre away, although vacancies are still lower for buildings near SkyTrain.

In Richmond, the report said, the vacancy rate near Canada Line is well below half the rate of the rest of the municipality.

bmorton@vancouversun.com

 

The Ultimate BRT

Here we have the next generation of rapid bus. I understand Translink is sending stakeholders (first class) to see the new BRT in Action.

Rumour has that the first trials will take place the first day of April, 2012.

The following is a preview of the new  BRT.

BRT Vision

I think I'll take a tram instead!